build-context — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited build-context (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Generates a CONTEXT.md — a living glossary that aligns three groups around shared language: the codebase, the developers building it, and the domain experts who understand the problem. When all three speak the same vocabulary, communication becomes precise and the code reflects reality.
Run this at any point in a project. The earlier it's established, the better — but mid-project is fine too. The output is a versioned, editable file that grows with the project.
Before writing anything, collect material from every available source:
Conversation history Scan the current conversation (and search past conversations if the tool is available) for:
Memory Check the user's memory for project-specific context — stack names, system names, company structure, role descriptions, known domain vocabulary.
Notes and files If file access is available, look for:
Codebase If a codebase is accessible (via file tools, GitHub MCP, or uploads):
From everything gathered, extract a candidate list of terms. Aim to cover:
For each term, attempt a one-to-two sentence definition and a list of terms to avoid.
Before writing the final CONTEXT.md, surface any uncertainties. Work through them one question at a time — do not dump a list of questions on the user.
Terms that need clarification (things gathered but not well-defined): Ask the user directly, and always include a recommended definition as a starting point. Format:
"I picked up the term Subscriber throughout the conversation, but it's not fully defined. I'd suggest: A person with an active paid or trial subscription to the publication. Does that sound right, or would you adjust it?"
Terms that seem missing (concepts implied but not named): If there's a clear concept operating in the project that hasn't been named, suggest it. Format:
"There seems to be a concept of a lapsed subscriber — someone whose subscription has expired but who hasn't cancelled. It might be worth naming and defining that explicitly. Want to include it?"
Ask one question at a time. Wait for a response before moving to the next. Continue until:
Once terms are confirmed, produce the file using this exact format:
# {Context Name}
{One or two sentence description of what this context is and why it exists.}
## Language
**{Term}**:
{One or two sentence definition. Precise and plain. Avoid implementation detail unless it's essential to the definition.}
_Avoid_: {comma-separated list of synonyms or near-synonyms to retire}Ordering: Alphabetical within the Language section, unless there's a strong reason to group related terms (e.g. a cluster of financial terms, or a cluster of user-role terms). If grouped, add a brief subheading.
Definitions should:
Avoid lists should:
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.